PERSONAL FACTORS

PERSONALITY FACTORS

The affective domain describes learning objectives that emphasize a feeling tone, an emotion, or a degree of acceptance or rejection. Affective objectives vary from simple attention to selected phenomena to complex but internally consistent qualities of character and conscience. We found a large number of such objectives in the literature expressed as interests, attitudes, appreciations, values, and emotional sets or biases. [from Krathwohl et al, 1964 ]

Here are descriptions of each step in the taxonomy, starting at the most basic level. (From Krathwohl's Taxonomy of Affective Domain)

Receiving is being aware of or sensitive to the existence of certain ideas, material, or phenomena and being willing to tolerate them. Examples include: to differentiate, to accept, to listen (for), to respond to.

Responding is committed in some small measure to the ideas, materials, or phenomena involved by actively responding to them. Examples are: to comply with, to follow, to commend, to volunteer, to spend leisure time in, to acclaim.

Valuing is willing to be perceived by others as valuing certain ideas, materials, or phenomena. Examples include: to increase measured proficiency in, to relinquish, to subsidize, to support, to debate.

Organization is to relate the value to those already held and bring it into a harmonious and internally consistent philosophy. Examples are: to discuss, to theorize, to formulate, to balance, to examine.

Characterization by value or value set is to act consistently in accordance with the values he or she has internalized. Examples include: to revise, to require, to be rated high in the value, to avoid, to resist, to manage, to resolve.
What is the relevance of the affective domain in education?

If we are striving to apply the continuum of Krathwohl et al. to our teaching, then we are encouraging students to not just receive information at the bottom of the affective hierarchy. We'd like for them to respond to what they learn, to value it, to organize it and maybe even to characterize themselves as science students, science majors or scientists.

We are also interested in students' attitudes toward science, scientists, learning science and specific science topics. We want to find teaching methods that encourage students and draw them in. Affective topics in educational literature include attitudes, motivation, communication styles, classroom management styles, learning styles, use of technology in the classroom and nonverbal communication. It is also important not to turn students off by subtle actions or communications that go straight to the affective domain and prevent students from becoming engaged.

In the educational literature, nearly every author introduces their paper by stating that the affective domain is essential for learning, but it is the least studied, most often overlooked, the most nebulous and the hardest to evaluate of Bloom's three domains. In formal classroom teaching, the majority of the teacher's efforts typically go into the cognitive aspects of the teaching and learning and most of the classroom time is designed for cognitive outcomes. Similarly, evaluating cognitive learning is straightforward but assessing affective outcomes is difficult. Thus, there is significant value in realizing the potential to increase student learning by tapping into the affective domain. Similarly, students may experience affective roadblocks to learning that can neither be recognized nor solved when using a purely cognitive approach

AFFECTIVE FACTORS IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION

Understanding how human beings feel and respond and believe and value is an exceedingly important aspect of a theory of second language acquisition. We turn now to a consideration of specific affective factors in human behavior and how they relate to second language acquisition.

Self-Esteem

Self-esteem is a kind of self-judgment of worth or value. It is a basic requirement for successful cognitive and affective activity. People have this notion of self-esteem from their inner experience and their relationship

with the outside world. Self-esteem has three levels: global/general self-esteem, situational self-esteem and task self-esteem. Normally, successful language learners have higher self-esteem than unsuccessful ones.

Cognitive learning is fostered in an atmosphere in which self-esteem is promoted.

1 .General or global self esteem is said to be relatively stable in mature adult, and is resistant to change except by active and extended thraphy. It is the general or prevaling assessment one makes of one’s own worth over time and across a number of situations.

2.Situational or specifc self esteem refers to one’s selfappraisals in particular life situations, such as social nteraction, work education, home, or on certain relatively discretely defined traits, such as intelligence, communicative ability, athletic abilty, or personality traits likegregariosness emphaty, and lexibility.

3.Task self esteem relates to particular taskswithin specific situations. For example, within the educational domain, task self esteem might refer to one subject mater area.

Attribution Theory

Attribution theory focuses on how people attribute the cause of an event and how those beliefs interact with internal perception of themselves. Attribution Theory defines three major elements of cause: Locus, Stability, and Control ability.

1. Locus - determining the location of the cause—internal (dispositional) or external (situational) to the person • Influential to feelings of self-esteem and self-efficacy • If success or failure is attributed to internal factors, success will lead to pride and increased self-efficacy, whereas failure will diminish self-esteem and negatively affect self-efficacy

2. Stability - whether the cause is static or dynamic over time • Closely related to expectations and goals in the future • If students attribute their failure to stable factors such as the difficulty of the subject, they will expect to fail in that subject in the future

3. Controllability - whether the person is actively in control of the cause • Related to emotions such as anger, pity, gratitude, or shame • Conflict can arise if we feel we have not done our best; guilt • If we attribute our own abilities to success we will increase self-efficacy • Failing at a task we cannot control can lead to shame or anger.

Self Efficacy

If a learner feels he or she is capable of carrng out a given task, iniate other words, a high sense of self efficacy, an appropriate degree of effort may be devoted to achieving success. People generally avoid tasks where their self-efficacy is low, but will engage in tasks where their self-efficacy is high. People with a self-efficacy significantly beyond their actual ability often overestimate their ability to complete tasks, which can lead to difficulties. On the other hand, people with a self-efficacy significantly lower than their ability are unlikely to grow and expand their skills. Research shows that the ‘optimum’ level of self-efficacy is a little above ability, which encourages people to tackle challenging tasks and gain valuable experience.

People with high self-efficacy in a task are more likely to make more of an effort, and persist longer, than those with low efficacy. The stronger the self-efficacy or mastery expectations are, the more active the efforts. On the other hand, low self-efficacy provides an incentive to learn more about the subject. As a result, someone with a high self-efficacy may not prepare sufficiently for a task.

Low self-efficacy can lead people to believe tasks are harder than they actually are. This often results in poor task planning, as well as increased stress. Observational evidence shows that people become erratic and unpredictable when engaging in a task in which they have low self-efficacy. On the other hand, people with high self-efficacy often take a wider overview of a task in order to take the best route of action. People with high self-efficacy are shown to be encouraged by obstacles to make a greater effort. Self-efficacy also affects how people respond to failure. A person with a high self-efficacy will attribute the failure to external factors, where a person with low self-efficacy will attribute failure to low ability. For example; a person with high self-efficacy in regards to mathematics may attribute a poor result to a harder than usual test, feeling sick, lack of effort or insufficient preparation. A person with a low self-efficacy will attribute the result to poor ability in mathematics.

Empirical Findings

Research done by Paul K. Maciejewski found that levels of self-efficacy play a significant role on our interactions well into adulthood. He studied the interactions of adults in stressful situations and found that those reporting high amounts of self-efficacy were better able to cope with the demanding and stressful conditions that are commonly found in the work environment. Those who reported low levels of self-efficacy found themselves highly stressed and frustrated at their work which led to decreased productivity and increased signs of depression and instability. It was also found that the people who had a history of mental illness were much more likely to have low levels of self-efficacy even if their mental episodes were not recent. These findings suggest that self-efficacy is closely related to mood and emotional states.

Research done by Sharon Andrew and Wilma Vialle also show the connection between personalized self-efficacy and productivity. They studied the academic achievements of students involved in science classes in Australia and found that students with high levels of self-efficacy show a boost in academic performance compared to those who reported low self-efficacy. The researchers found that confident individuals typically took control over their own learning experience and were more likely to participate in class and preferred hands-on learning experiences. Those individuals reporting low self-efficacy typically shied away from academic interactions and isolated themselves in their studies.

Bandura showed that people of differing self-efficacy perceive the world in fundamentally different ways. People with a high self-efficacy are generally of the opinion that they are in control of their own lives; that their own actions and decisions shape their lives. On the other hand, people with low self-efficacy may see their lives as somewhat out of their hands.

Willingness to communicate

A factor related to attribution theory and self efficacy, one that has seen a surge of recent interest in the research literature , is the extent to which learners display a willingness to communicate as they tackle a second language. Willingness to communicate may be defined as “ an underlying continuum representing the predisposition toward or away from communicating, given the choice” (MacIntyre et al., 2002,p.538). Emerging from studies and assertions about terms sometimes label as “shyness” researchers have now been examining the extent to which willingness to communicate is a factor not just in second language acquisition, but one that may have its roots in learner’s first language communication patterns(MacIntyre et al., 2002)

Inhibition

Inhibition is closely related to self-esteem: the weaker the self-esteem; the stronger the inhibition to protect the weak ego. Ehrman (1993)suggests that students with thick, perfectionist boundaries find language learning more difficult than those learners with thin boundaries who favour attitudes of openness and the tolerance of ambiguity. As Brown (1994)noted, language learning implies a great deal of self-exposure as it necessarily involves making mistakes. Due to the defense mechanisms outlined above, these mistakes can be experienced as threats to the self. It can be argued that the students arrive at the classroom with those defenses already built and that little can be done to remove them. However, classroom experience shows that the teacher 's attitude towards mistakes can reinforce these barriers creating, in the long run, learning blocks, or the self-fulfilling prophecy: “I can't do it. I 'm not good at it. ” In short, , this produces in the learner a deep-seated fear of inadequacy and deficiency. Fortunately, we are witnessing that a growing number of language teachers are becoming increasingly aware that focusing on students' strengths rather than weaknesses is a powerful way to break down learning blocks and overcome inhibition.

Risk Taking

One of the prominent characteristics of good language learners, according to Rubin and Thompson (1982), was the ability to make intelligent guesses. Impulsivity was also described as a style that could have positive effects on language success. And we have just seen that inhibitions, or building defences around our egos, can be detriment. These factors suggest that risk taking is an important characteristic of successful learning of a second language.

Beebe (1983, p.41) cited a study which claimed that “persons with a high motivation to achive are… moderate, not high, risk takers. These individuals like to be in control and like to depend on skill. They do not take wild, frivolos risks or enter into no win situations.” A learner might be too bold in blurring out meaningless verbal garbage that no one can quite understand, while success lies in an optimum point where calculated guesses are ventured. Successful language learners make willing and accurate guesses.

Risk-taki,ng variations seems to be a factor in a number of issues in second language acquisition and pedagogy. The silent student in the classroom is one who is unwilling to appear foolish when mistakes are made. Self-esteem seems to be closely connected to a risk-taking factor; when those foolish mistakes are made, a person with high global self-esteem is not daunted by the possible consequences of being laughed at. The implications for teaching are important. In a few uncommen cases, overly high risk takers, as they dominate the classroom with wild gambles, may need to be “tamed” a bit by the teacher.

Anxiety

Intricately intertwined with self-esteem, self-efficacy, inhibition, and risk taking, the construct of anxiety plays a major affective role in a second language acquisition. Anxiety is associated with feeling of uneasiness, frustration, self-doubt, apprehension, or worry ( Scovel,1978,p.13,i)

The research on anxiety suggests that anxiety, like self-esteem, can be experienced at various levels ( Horwitz,2001; Oxford,1999). At the deepest, or global level, trait anxiety is a more permanent predisposition to be anxious. At a more momentary, or situational level, state anxiety is experienced in relation to some particular event or act.

Three components of foreign language anxiety have been identified ( Horwitz, Horwitz,&Cope, 1986; Macintyre & Gardner, 1989, 1991c) in order to break down the construct into researchable issues:

1. Communication apprehension, arising, from learner’ inability to adequately express mature thoughts and ideas

2. Fear of negative social evaluation, arising from a learners’ need to make a positive social impression on others

3. Test anxiety or apprehension over academic evaluation

Yet another important insight to be applied to our understanding of anxiety lies in the distinction between debilitative and ficilitative anxiety( Alpert and Haber,1960; Scovel,1978), or what Oxford (1999) called “harmful” and “helpful” anxiety. More recently, Spielmann & Radnofsky (2001) preferred to identify tension as a more neutral concept to describe the possibility of both “dsyphoric” (detrimental) and “euphoric” (beneficial) effects in learning a foreign language.

It could be well that a little nervous tension in the process is a good thing. Both too much and too little anxiety may hinder the process of successful second language learning.

Even with some controversies about causes and effects of language anxiety, and some questions about how to avoid or ameliorate anxiety in foreign language classes, some progress has been made over the last few years’ toward a better understanding of the phonomenon. Spielman and Radnofsky (2001) found that students of French in Vermont who were able to “reinvent” themselves in their foreign language were able to garner more euphoric tension. Levine ( 2003) suggested in a study of German as a foreign language that anxiety with teachers. Anxiety was correlated with low perceived self- worth, competence, and intelligence in a study by Bailey, Onwuegbuzie, and Daley(2000).

Empathy

Transaction is the process of reaching out beyond the self to others, and language is a major tool used to accomplish that process. A variety of transactional variables may apply to second language learning; imitation, modeling, identification, emphaty, extroversion, aggression, style of communication, and others.

Emphaty is the process of “putting yourself into someone elses’s shoes,” of reaching beyond the self to understand what another person is feeling. Language is one of the primary means of empathizing, but nonverbal communication facilitates the process of empathizing and must not be overlooked.

Emphaty is usually described asw the projection of one’s own personality into the personality of others in other to understand them better. You cannot fully empathize—or known someone else—until you adequately know yourself.

Communication requires a sophisticated degree of empathy. In order to communicative effectively, you need to be able to understand the other person’s affective and cognitive states; communication breaks down when false presuppositions or assumptions are made about the other person’s state.

Oral communication is a case in which, cognitively at least, it is easy to achieve emphatetic communication because there is immediate feedback from the hearer. A misunderstood word,phrase, or idea can be questioned by the hearer and then rephrased by the speaker until a clear message is interpreted. Written communication requires a special kind of emphaty – a “cognitive” emphaty in which the writer, without the benefit of immediate feedback from the reader, must communicate ideas by means of a very clear empathetic intuition and judgement of the reader’s state of mind and structure of knowledge.

So in a second language learning situation, the problem of empathy becomes acute. Not only must learners correctly identify cognitive and affective sets in the hearer, but they must do so in a language in wgich they are insecure.

Extroversion

Extroversion and its counterpart, introversion, are also potentially important factors in the acquisition of a second language.

Extroversion is the extent to which a person has a deep seated need to receive ego enhancement, self-esteem, and a sense of wholeness from other people as opposed to receiving that affirmation within oneself. Extroverts actually need other people in order to feel “good” . But extroverts are not necessarily loudmouthed and talkative. They may be relatively shy but still need the affirmation of others. Introversion, on the other hand, is the extent to which a person derives a sense of wholeness and fulfillment apart from a reflection of this self from other people. Contrary to our stereotypes, introverts can have an inner strenght of character that extroverts do not have.

The extroverted person may actually behave in an extroverted manner in order to protect his or her own ego, with extroverted behavior being symptomatic of defensive barriers and high ego boundaries. At the same time the introverted, quieter, more reserved person may show high empathy – an intuitive understanding and apprehension of others – and simply be more reserved in the outward and overt expression of empathy.

It is not clear then, that extroversion or introversion helps or hinders the process of second language acquisition.

On a practical level, the facilitating or interfering of certain language teaching practices that invoke extroversion need to be carefully considered.

PERSONALITY TYPES IN LANGUAGE ACQUISITION
Personality types

Personality type theory aims to classify people into distinct categories i.e. this type or that. Personality types are synonymous with "personality styles".

Types refer to categories that are distinct and discontinuous. e.g. you are one or the other. This is important to understand, because it helps to distinguish a personality type approach from a personality trait approach, which takes a continuous approach.

To clearly understand the difference between types and traits, consider the example of the personality dimension of "introversion". We can view introversion as:

• A personality type approach says you are either an introvert or an extravert

• A personality trait approach says you can be anywhere on a continuum ranging from introversion to extraversion, with most people clustering in the middle, and fewer people towards the extremes

The following sections provide an overview of some of the more popular and commonly known personality type taxonomies.

Allport and Odbert (1936, cited in Funder, 1999) found over 17,000 words in the dictionary which referred to psychological differences between people, e.g., trustworthy, shy, arrogant. Typically, modern personality taxonomies have emphasized between two, three, four, and five personality types, through to identifying 16 or more subtypes.

The Four Humors - Ancient Greeks (~2000 BC - 0 AD)

Ancient Greek philosophers such as Hippocrates 400 BC and Galen, 140/150 AD classified 4 types of "humors" in people. Each type was believed to be due to an excess of one of four bodily fluids, corresponding to their character. The personalities were termed "humors".

Character      Humor                   Fluid               Corresponding
                                                                             Trait in the
                                                                              Big 5

Irritable Choleric yellow bile Agreeableness

Depressed Melancholic black bile Neuroticism

Optimistic Sanguine blood Openness to
experience

Calm Phlegmatic phlegm Neuroticism

Sixteen Personality Types

ISTJ

Serious and quiet, interested in security and peaceful living. Extremely thorough, responsible, and dependable. Well-developed powers of concentration. Usually interested in supporting and promoting traditions and establishments. Well-organized and hard working, they work steadily towards identified goals. They can usually accomplish any task once they have set their mind to it.

ISTP

Quiet and reserved, interested in how and why things work. Excellent skills with mechanical things. Risk-takers who they live for the moment. Usually interested in and talented at extreme sports. Uncomplicated in their desires. Loyal to their peers and to their internal value systems, but not overly concerned with respecting laws and rules if they get in the way of getting something done. Detached and analytical, they excel at finding solutions to practical problems.

ISFJ

Quiet, kind, and conscientious. Can be depended on to follow through. Usually puts the needs of others above their own needs. Stable and practical, they value security and traditions. Well-developed sense of space and function. Rich inner world of observations about people. Extremely perceptive of other's feelings. Interested in serving others.

ISFP

Quiet, serious, sensitive and kind. Do not like conflict, and not likely to do things which may generate conflict. Loyal and faithful. Extremely well-developed senses and aesthetic appreciation for beauty. Not interested in leading or controlling others. Flexible and open-minded. Likely to be original and creative. Enjoy the present moment.

INFJ

Quietly forceful, original, and sensitive. Tend to stick to things until they are done. Extremely intuitive about people, and concerned for their feelings. Well-developed value systems which they strictly adhere to. Well-respected for their perseverance in doing the right thing. Likely to be individualistic, rather than leading or following.

INFP

Quiet, reflective, and idealistic. Interested in serving humanity. Well-developed value system, which they strive to live in accordance with. Extremely loyal. Adaptable and laid-back unless a strongly-held value is threatened. Usually talented writers. Mentally quick, and able to see possibilities. Interested in understanding and helping people.

INTJ

Independent, original, analytical, and determined. Have an exceptional ability to turn theories into solid plans of action. Highly value knowledge, competence, and structure. Driven to derive meaning from their visions. Long-range thinkers. Have very high standards for their performance, and the performance of others. Natural leaders, but will follow if they trust existing leaders.

INTP

Logical, original, creative thinkers. Can become very excited about theories and ideas. Exceptionally capable and driven to turn theories into clear understandings. Highly value knowledge, competence and logic. Quiet and reserved, hard to get to know well. Individualistic, having no interest in leading or following others.

ESTP

Friendly, adaptable, action-oriented. "Doers" who are focused on immediate results. Living in the here-and-now, they're risk-takers who live fast-paced lifestyles. Impatient with long explanations. Extremely loyal to their peers, but not usually respectful of laws and rules if they get in the way of getting things done. Great people skills.

ESTJ

Practical, traditional, and organized. Likely to be athletic. Not interested in theory or abstraction unless they see the practical application. Have clear visions of the way things should be. Loyal and hard-working. Like to be in charge. Exceptionally capable in organizing and running activities. "Good citizens" who value security and peaceful living.

ESFP

People-oriented and fun-loving, they make things more fun for others by their enjoyment. Living for the moment, they love new experiences. They dislike theory and impersonal analysis. Interested in serving others. Likely to be the center of attention in social situations. Well-developed common sense and practical ability.

ESFJ

Warm-hearted, popular, and conscientious. Tend to put the needs of others over their own needs. Feel strong sense of responsibility and duty. Value traditions and security. Interested in serving others. Need positive reinforcement to feel good about themselves. Well-developed sense of space and function.

ENFP

Enthusiastic, idealistic, and creative. Able to do almost anything that interests them. Great people skills. Need to live life in accordance with their inner values. Excited by new ideas, but bored with details. Open-minded and flexible, with a broad range of interests and abilities.

ENFJ

Popular and sensitive, with outstanding people skills. Externally focused, with real concern for how others think and feel. Usually dislike being alone. They see everything from the human angle, and dislike impersonal analysis. Very effective at managing people issues, and leading group discussions. Interested in serving others, and probably place the needs of others over their own needs.

ENTP

Creative, resourceful, and intellectually quick. Good at a broad range of things. Enjoy debating issues, and may be into "one-up-manship". They get very excited about new ideas and projects, but may neglect the more routine aspects of life. Generally outspoken and assertive. They enjoy people and are stimulating company. Excellent ability to understand concepts and apply logic to find solutions.

ENTJ

Assertive and outspoken - they are driven to lead. Excellent ability to understand difficult organizational problems and create solid solutions. Intelligent and well-informed, they usually excel at public speaking. They value knowledge and competence, and usually have little patience with inefficiency or disorganization.

Analysis of personality

Determining one's natural Myers-Briggs Type or one's Personality Type is frequently complicated by our life-long learning experiences. The classic question is: "Am I this way because I learned it or is this just the way I am?"

In reviewing the comparisons in our inventory, you may find yourself drawn equally to opposing choices. In such cases I suggest you try to think back to how you were before the age of 12 or even younger if you can recall. The rationale for this suggestion is the fact that by the time we are 3 years old, the core of our cognitive organization is well-fixed. . . although the brain continues to allow some plasticity until puberty.

After the onset of puberty, our adult learning begins to overlay our core personality - which is when the blending of nature and nurture becomes more evident. For some people, this "learning" serves to strengthen what is already there, but with others it produces multiple faces to personality. Discovering or rediscovering this innate core of yourself is part of the journey of using personality type to enrich your life.

Each of the four questions of the CSI inventory has two parts. The first part is a general description of the preference choices. The second part is a list of paired statements. Use both parts to form your opinion on your more dominant preference.

Q1. Which is your most natural energy orientation?

Every person has two faces. One is directed towards the OUTER world of activities, excitements, people, and things. The other is directed inward to the INNER world of thoughts, interests, ideas, and imagination.
While these are two different but complementary sides of our nature, most people have an innate preference towards energy from either the OUTER or the INNER world. Thus one of their faces, either the Extraverted (E) or Introverted (I), takes the lead in their personality development and plays a more dominant role in their behavior.

Extraverted Characteristics

• Act first, think/reflect later

• Feel deprived when cutoff from interaction with the outside world

• Usually open to and motivated by outside world of people and things

• Enjoy wide variety and change in people relationships

Introverted Characteristics

• Think/reflect first, then Act

• Regularly require an amount of "private time" to recharge batteries

• Motivated internally, mind is sometimes so active it is "closed" to outside world

• Prefer one-to-one communication and relationships

Choose which best fits:

Extraversion (E)

Introversion (I)
Q2. Which way of Perceiving or understanding is most "automatic" or natural?

The Sensing (S) side of our brain notices the sights, sounds, smells and all the sensory details of the PRESENT. It categorizes, organizes, records and stores the specifics from the here and now. It is REALITY based, dealing with "what is." It also provides the specific details of memory & recollections from PAST events.

The Intuitive (N) side of our brain seeks to understand, interpret and form OVERALL patterns of all the information that is collected and records these patterns and relationships. It speculates on POSSIBILITIES, including looking into and forecasting the FUTURE. It is imaginative and conceptual.

While both kinds of perceiving are necessary and used by all people, each of us instinctively tends to favor one over the other.

Sensing Characteristics

• Mentally live in the Now, attending to present opportunities

• Using common sense and creating practical solutions is automatic-instinctual

• Memory recall is rich in detail of facts and past events

• Best improvise from past experience

• Like clear and concrete information; dislike guessing when facts are "fuzzy"

Intuitive Characteristics

• Mentally live in the Future, attending to future possibilities

• Using imagination and creating/inventing new possibilities is automatic-instinctual

• Memory recall emphasizes patterns, contexts, and connections

• Best improvise from theoretical understanding

• Comfortable with ambiguous, fuzzy data and with guessing its meaning.

Choose which best fits:

Sensing (S)

Intuition (N)

Q3. Which way of forming Judgments and making choices is most natural?

The Thinking (T) side of our brain analyzes information in a DETACHED, objective fashion. It operates from factual principles, deduces and forms conclusions systematically. It is our logical nature.

The Feeling (F) side of our brain forms conclusions in an ATTACHED and somewhat global manner, based on likes/dislikes, impact on others, and human and aesthetic values. It is our subjective nature.

While everyone uses both means of forming conclusions, each person has a natural bias towards one over the other so that when they give us conflicting directions - one side is the natural trump card or tiebreaker.

Thinking Characteristics

• Instinctively search for facts and logic in a decision situation.

• Naturally notices tasks and work to be accomplished.

• Easily able to provide an objective and critical analysis.

• Accept conflict as a natural, normal part of relationships with people.

Feeling Characteristics

• Instinctively employ personal feelings and impact on people in decision situations

• Naturally sensitive to people needs and reactions.

• Naturally seek consensus and popular opinions.

• Unsettled by conflict; have almost a toxic reaction to disharmony.

Choose which best fits:

Thinking (T)

Feeling (F)

Q4. What is your "action orientation" towards the outside world?

All people use both judging (thinking and feeling) and perceiving (sensing and intuition) processes to store information, organize our thoughts, make decisions, take actions and manage our lives. Yet one of these processes (Judging or Perceiving) tends to take the lead in our relationship with the outside world . . . while the other governs our inner world.

A Judging (J) style approaches the outside world WITH A PLAN and is oriented towards organizing one's surroundings, being prepared, making decisions and reaching closure and completion.

A Perceiving (P) style takes the outside world AS IT COMES and is adopting and adapting, flexible, open-ended and receptive to new opportunities and changing game plans.

Judging Characteristics

• Plan many of the details in advance before moving into action.

• Focus on task-related action; complete meaningful segments before moving on.

• Work best and avoid stress when able to keep ahead of deadlines.

• Naturally use targets, dates and standard routines to manage life.

Perceiving Characteristics

• Comfortable moving into action without a plan; plan on-the-go.

• Like to multitask, have variety, mix work and play.

• Naturally tolerant of time pressure; work best close to the deadlines.

• Instinctively avoid commitments which interfere with flexibility, freedom and variety

Choose which best fits:

Judging (J)

Perceiving (P)
Your 4 Personality Type Letters

MEASURING AFFECTIVE FACTORS

Myers Briggs test leads us to probe issues surrounding the measurement of effective factors. Some affective factors can be reliably measured by means of indirect measures or by formal interviews. Also, language teaching profession has quite consistently relied on paper and pencil tests, such as, Myers Briggs test. For example, we are asked to decide if we tend to “stay late, with increasing energy” an item designed to measure extraversion vs. introversion. Or, to indicate a judging vs. perceiving style, we must choose between “arriving on time” for meetings and usually being “a little late”.

Also, measuring affectivity can be sometimes problem. Firstly, the important issue in measuring affectivity is the problem of validity. Because most tests use a self-rating method, one can justifiably ask whether or not self- perceptions are accurate. True, external assessments that involve interview, observation, indirect measures, and multiple methods have been shown to be more accurate. Paper and pencil self- ratings may be valid if (1) the tests have been widely dated previously and (2) we do not rely on only one instrument or method to identify a level of affectivity. A second related problem lies in what has been called the “self- flattery” syndrome. In general, test takers will try to discern “right” answers to questions, even though test directions say there is no right or wrong answers. Finally, test of extroversion, anxiety, motivation, and other items can be quite culturally ethnocentric, using concepts and references that are difficult to interpret cross culturally.

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN THE CLASSROOM

There are so many applications and implications of affective variables at work in the classroom that it is difficult to know where to begin. You could not begin to instruct a classroom of students without attending to their self- efficacy, anxieties, motivations and other personality variables.

Intrinsic motivation occurs when people engage in an activity, such as a hobby, without obvious external incentives. This form of motivation has been studied by social and educational psychologists since the early 1970s. Research has found that it is usually associated with high educational achievement and enjoyment by students. Intrinsic motivation has been explained by Fritz Heider’s attribution theory, Bandura’s work on self-efficacy, and Ryan and Deci’s cognitive evaluation theory. Students are likely to be intrinsically motivated if they:

• attribute their educational results to internal factors that they can control (e.g. the amount of effort they put in),

• believe they can be effective agents in reaching desired goals (i.e. the results are not determined by luck),

• are interested in mastering a topic, rather than just rote-learning to achieve good grades.

Suggestions for creating intrinsically motivating classroom activities;

 Does the activity appeal to the genuine interest of your students? Is it relevant to their lives?

 Do you present the activity in a positive, enthusiastic manner?

 Are students clearly aware of the purpose of the activity?

 Do students have some choice in choosing some aspect of the activity?

 Does it encourage students in some way to develop or use effective strategiesof learning and communication?

 Does the activity present a “reasonable challenge”?

 Do students receive sufficient feedback on their performance?

Suggested reading:

http://www2.gsu.edu/~dschjb/wwwmbti.html
http://www.wischik.com/damon/Texts/myersbriggstrek.html
http://stress.about.com/od/understandingstress/a/type_a_person.htm
Oral, Obsessive, and Hysterical Personality Patterns
An Investigation of Psychoanalytic Concepts by Means of Factor Analysis
AARON LAZARE, MD; GERALD L. KLERMAN, MD; DAVID J. ARMOR, PhD
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1966; 14(6):624-630.
http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/fehringer.html

PERSONAL FACTORS

Sayfalar

İzleyiciler

Hakkımda